[game_edu] Why define a game? (was Re: Definition of a Game)

[Ian Schreiber]

To me, it's important to address this early on in an intro game design class, for the same reason that other fields do this (e.g. a biology class might ask for a definition of "life"): to set the context, boundaries and expectations of what the course will and will not cover.

There are a host of other useful reasons to discuss this with students:
* It is a perennial discussion among some practicing game designers, so it is good to introduce them to the basics of the discussion so far... to indoctrinate them into game developer culture, if you will :)
* All definitions are flawed, and students need to realize the impossibility of a single perfect all-encompassing definition. (I like to ask students to define it, and then to come up with counterexamples, just to drive the point home.)
* From examining many definitions, we can find common attributes of games (such as play, goals/objectives, rules, etc.). These attributes are ultimately the building blocks (atoms?) of games, they are the things we actually design, and they are therefore extremely important to identify.

I think the discussion is less practical at the professional level; it's more important to learn how to make a good game than to define the word "game."

- Ian




________________________________
From: steve graham <skg at dsu.edu>
To: IGDA Game Education Listserv <game_edu at igda.org>
Sent: Fri, December 11, 2009 3:59:16 PM
Subject: [game_edu] Why define a game? (was Re:  Definition of a Game)

I have certainly spent my share of time thinking about what a game is and the myriad choices of definitions and defining characteristics. I even have my own theories and favorites. However, while I spend time on defining characteristics and feel it is time worth spending, I often end up coming back to the question:

What difference does it make?

Or to frame this question in a way that may be a bit more constructive:

How does any particular theory or definition of games inform my design and development of a game?

I don't have an answer I'm happy with.

My intuition is that the theorizing does have a significant effect, but not one that is obvious or clear to me. I'd really like to hear others' thoughts.

How *does* defining "game" (or "play" or ...) positively impact design and development?

(Of course, I could be fooling myself. It could all be negative -- a futile waste of time and energy with no consequences, as we argue nits with each other. But it doesn't seem like that. Why not?)

cheers,
skg


-- steve graham
associate professor
computer game design
dakota state university
skg at dsu.edu
605-480-6603

_______________________________________________
game_edu mailing list
game_edu at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_edu/attachments/20091211/92920f57/attachment-0001.html>